Williams v. Browman’s Empirical Analysis
981 F.2d 901 · 1992
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Lavado v. Keohane (1993), Ratliff v. United States (1993)
37 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1746 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · Whitley v. Albers · Johnson v. Glick · Lee v. Texas
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the same force and effect as an affidavit”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]istrict court erred in granting defendants' motion for summary judgment without first informing pro se plaintiff of his 'right to file affidavits to oppose the summary judgment.' " However, "[t]here is no authority in this Circuit for the proposition that a district court must advise a pro se prisoner of his right to file counter-affidavits or other responsive material or that he must be alerted to the fact that his failure to so respond with such material might result in entry of summary judgment against him.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.